Bobby Jindal’s Bipartisan Health- Care Reform. Updated July 2. 2, 2.
ET. In Washington, it seems history always repeats itself. That’s what’s happening now with health- care reform. This is an unfortunate turn of events for Americans who are legitimately concerned about the skyrocketing cost of a basic human need. In 1. 99. 3 and 1. Hillary Clinton’s health- care reform proposal failed because it was concocted in secret without the guiding hand of public consensus- building, and because it was a philosophical over- reach. Today President Barack Obama is repeating these mistakes. The reason is plain: The left in Washington has concluded that honesty will not yield its desired policy result. So it resorts to a fundamentally dishonest approach to reform. I say this because the marketing of the Democrats’ plans as presented in the House of Representatives and endorsed heartily by President Obama rests on three falsehoods. Obama doggedly promises that if you like your (private) health- care coverage now, you can keep it. That promise is hollow, because the Democrats’ reforms are designed to push an ever- increasing number of Americans into a government- run health- care plan. The Wall Street Journal. Also in WSJ.com: Share; Tweet; The Experts: Health Care. Health Care Report and future Reports. Wall Street Journal misleads on cost control under health care reform. A Wall Street Journal editorial claimed that a. Health care reform reduces. If a so- called public option is part of health- care reform, the Lewin Group study estimates over 1. Americans may leave private plans for government- run health care. Any government plan will benefit from taxpayer subsidies and be able to operate at a financial loss—competing unfairly in the marketplace until private plans are driven out of business. The government plan will become so large that it will set, rather than negotiate, prices. This will inevitably lead to monopoly, with a resulting threat to the quality of our health care. Compare the health-care bill that won approval on Capitol Hill late Sunday. Write to the Online Journal's editors at. Health-Care Reform in.Second, the Democrats disingenuously argue their reforms will not diminish the quality of our health care even as government involvement in the delivery of that health care increases massively. For all of us who have seen the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s response to hurricanes, this contention is laughable on its face. When government bureaucracies drive the delivery of services—in this case inserting themselves between health- care providers and their patients—quality degradation will surely come. House Democrats seem willing to accept that problem to achieve their philosophical aim—the long- term removal of for- profit entities from the health- care landscape. Third, Mr. Obama’s rhetoric paints a picture of a massive new benefit that will actually cost average Americans less than what they pay today. The Democrats want middle- class taxpayers to believe they won’t feel the pinch of this initiative, even as their employers are assessed massive new taxes. They might as well try to argue that up is down. What effect will health care reform have on small businesses and the self-employed? The Wall Street Journal asked two business owners about their views on. The analysis of the Democrats’ proposal by the Congressional Budget Office shows that it will not reduce government spending on health care, and that it will substantially increase the federal deficit—and this despite all the tax increases. I served in the U. S. House with a majority of the current 4. I am confident that if given the proper amount of legislative review, they will not accept the flawed Pelosi plan that is currently stuck in committee. Yet there is general agreement among Republicans and Democrats that we need health- care reform to bring costs down. This agreement can be the basis of a genuine, bipartisan reform, once the current over- reach by Mr. Leaders of both parties can then come together behind health- care reform that stresses these seven principles: . We need a system where individuals choose an integrated plan that adopts the best disease- management practices, as opposed to fragmented care. Pricing and outcomes data for all tests, treatments and procedures should be posted on the Internet. Portable electronic health- care records can reduce paperwork, duplication and errors, while also empowering consumers to seek the provider that best meets their needs. Consumers should be financially invested in better health decisions through health- savings accounts, lower premiums and reduced cost sharing. If they seek care in cost- effective settings, comply with medical regimens, preventative care, and lifestyles that reduce the likelihood of chronic disease, they should share in the savings. The practice of defensive medicine costs an estimated $1. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, which used a study by economists Daniel P. No health reform is serious about reducing costs unless it reduces the costs of frivolous lawsuits. Congress should establish simple guidelines to make policies more portable, with more coverage for pre- existing conditions. Reinsurance, high- risk pools, and other mechanisms can reduce the dangers of adverse risk selection and the incentive to avoid covering the sick. Individuals should also be able to keep insurance as they change jobs or states. All consumers should have equal opportunity to buy the lowest- cost, highest- quality insurance available. Individuals should benefit from the economies of scale currently available to those working for large employers. They should be free to purchase their health coverage without tax penalty through their employer, church, union, etc. Roughly 7. 5% of health- care spending is for the care of chronic conditions such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes—and there is little coordination of this care. We can save money and improve outcomes by using integrated networks of care with rigorous, transparent outcome measures emphasizing prevention and disease management. Low- income working Americans without health insurance should get help in buying private coverage through a refundable tax credit. This is preferable to building a separate, government- run health- care plan. These steps would bring down health- care costs. They would not bankrupt our nation or increase taxes in the midst of a recession. They are achievable reforms with bipartisan consensus and public support. All they require is a willingness by the president to slow down and have an honest discussion with Americans about the real downstream consequences of his ideas. Jindal is governor of Louisiana. Obama's health care plan, explained. A bitter pill to swallow or just what the doctor ordered? If you’re wondering what President Obama’s proposed health care overhaul could mean to you and your family, here are some points to consider. Just how bad is our current health care delivery system? Though the country spends $2 trillion a year for health care, 4. Wall Street Journal. That number, from the Census Bureau, includes illegal immigrants, poor people who are eligible for Medicaid, and healthy young adults who don’t think they really need health insurance. As the recession continues, the number of uninsured appears to be on the rise, according to the Wall Street Journal. As many as 1. 4,0. Center for American Progress Action Fund, as reported in the Wall Street Journal. Why is health care reform turning out to be so hard to push through? A huge sticking point between the Republicans and the Democrats is whether to create a public plan - in effect, a government- run insurance plan, which would be competing against private plans in what would be an online marketplace, says the Wall Street Journal. Though President Obama is saying a government- run plan would keep private insurance companies honest, according to the Journal, Republicans say the government would have too much control over the nation’s health care. Another sticking point, says John Desser, vice president of public policy and government at e. Health, is just how health care delivery would work. Every time you try to change the incentives, the providers - which are the doctors and the hospitals - get nervous.”So just what would a public plan resemble? The nation already has a huge public plan: Medicare, which covers older Americans and certain other people. There are a few scenarios on the table. One, reports the Wall Street Journal, is to have a Medicare- like plan in which the government would directly set premiums and services. Another is to delay creating a whole new plan and to instead impose rules on the insurance companies that would try to make coverage accessible. After several years, if that is unworkable, the government insurance plan would be the fallback plan. Another idea, according to the Journal, would be to create various regional nonprofit insurance cooperatives. These would compete with private insurance companies. Would some industries stand to gain more from any overhaul? Because health insurers would get tens of millions of new customers since all Americans would be legally required to have health insurance, health insurers would stand to gain, according to the Journal. Drug companies would sell more prescription drugs because millions more Americans would have coverage for their prescription medications. And hospitals and physicians would not be providing as much free care as they do now, according to the Wall Street Journal. What would all this cost, and who will pay? That hasn’t really been ironed out yet. One prime target: the wealthy. One proposal would limit itemized tax deductions for families earning more than $2. Journal. Other ideas are imposing a surtax on wealthy individuals, or taxing sugary drinks and soda. Do Democrats and Republicans basically want the same thing? Both parties support changing how doctors and hospitals are paid, according to the Wall Street Journal, and both support the creation of online marketplaces so that consumers and small businesses can comparison shop for health clans. Democrats and Republicans don’t want insurance companies to be able to deny coverage to those who are sick. Is a proposed health care overhaul getting support from the medical community? The medical community is on board with health care reform, but just what they mean by reform depends upon who you talk to. Todd Schaeffer, a surgeon. Everyone should have a primary care doctor so people don’t flood the emergency room, for instance.”Medical malpractice is a sticking point, too.“I don’t think Obama is going to make any fixes on that,” Schaeffer says. But to leave medical malpractice out of the equation is a joke. We have to rein in the cost of medical malpractice.”There are many aspects of health care reform that doctors like.“There is a lot of virtue toward moving to universal coverage,” says Dr. Herbert Pardes, president and CEO of New York- Presbyterian Hospital. I already have insurance through my employer. Would things change for me? If lawmakers put an end to flexible spending accounts, you might lose some tax- free perks, says the Wall Street Journal. Down the road, if your employer drops health coverage and pays the government penalty for doing so, you could be deflected to the government insurance plan, according to the Journal. Does it look like the health care overhaul will happen anytime soon? President Obama went before a national audience Wednesday night to push his plan forward, but he offered little assurance that Congress would approve anything before its August recess. Though the President had given Congress a deadline of next month for sending him a health care bill, this week he backed off and said, “We will do it this year.”Send a Letter to the Editor. Join the Conversation: facebook.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
September 2017
Categories |